How are cockpits drained of water?

[NTS]

works the same for any car any engine out there. first of all there's an air filter so water is never 'flooding' in anyway,
and besides that, it isn't neccesarily bad. first of all there's always an amount of humidity when air enters an engine.

But the air intake of most formula cars forces air (and rain) into the intake at high speeds while my normal car has a much "dryer" intake setup. And I think F1 engines are very fine tuned so having more water in the intake could affect ratios and thus limit the maximum power output down the straights?

So are you sure teams don't have some extra filters or different settings to use in wet conditions?

[Manoah2u]

works the same for any car any engine out there. first of all there's an air filter so water is never 'flooding' in anyway,
and besides that, it isn't neccesarily bad. first of all there's always an amount of humidity when air enters an engine.

But the air intake of most formula cars forces air (and rain) into the intake at high speeds while my normal car has a much "dryer" intake setup. And I think F1 engines are very fine tuned so having more water in the intake could affect ratios and thus limit the maximum power output down the straights?

So are you sure teams don't have some extra filters or different settings to use in wet conditions?

Driving through basic rain is not going to be anything at all to worry about. Hydrolock (getting water into the engine and basically ruining it) is extremely rare in normal circumstances, but it is possible when driving through deep standing water. In order for your air filter to suck up water, it has to come into contact with large amounts of water. we're talking essentially driving submerged, through the river.

There's probably the option to have something installed like hydroshield, or bypass valves. still, factually, it's totally
unneccesarily.

There simply isn't enough concentrated water at the intake to cause an issue...same reason why a water/methanol injection system used to cool cylinder temps (with more water) or cool intake charge temps (with more methanol) won't cause hydrolock. There just isn't enough time, also, with the engines revving that high for a large amount of water to collect.
You have to think of the amount of water entering the intake in one second, and realize that in that one second that amount of water is distributed over 8, well, now 6 pistons that have already oscillated 150+ times (RPM = 10,000).
and imagine the effect on full revs.

with the old v8's, 2.4 liters at 12.5:1 compression ratio with a 18,000 rpm redline - You would have to suck up pure liquid water into the engine at 3500 liters per minute.

even at 200 mph the amount of water that goes in through the air inlet is spread throughout 8 cylinders that EACH go through the combustion cycle about 75 times per second.....the amount of water in the air in each engine's cycle is nothing to be concerned about even with f1's tight parameters.

[Henning]

I can agree with previous posts, that when moving the aerodynamics will take over. From personal experience, driving my wife's 2007 MX-5, the aerodynamics stop any water getting in the car over about 50mph. Driving along on the motorway and it started to rain, so apart from looking like nutters with the roof down, as long as the speed was above 50mph we were fine*.

From memory there are not many corners on an F1 track where the speed drops below 50mph and I think the multi-million-pound-CFD developed aerodynamics on an F1 car are far superior to those on the humble MX-5.

* All it took was a fast stop in a layby and a coordinated effort to close the roof together and there was minimal wetness.

[Aesto]

I remember Christian Danner saying on German television (RTL) that the cars actually do fill up a little. Then again, his experience is based on the 80s and the RTL people are generally a bunch of idiots, so who knows if this still applies to todays cars.

Two more things that would support him though:
I don't think F1 cars are easily comparable to open road cars in this regard, because the former still have windshields. Makes a big difference. At the very least, the drivers' overalls will get wet and drip some water down into the cockpit.

Second, I could definitely imagine that even if nothing goes in through the cockpit because of the airflow, some water must still be getting in by way of the driver cooling system in the nose of the car (unless they tape it off before the start).

[Pup]

Holes in the floor are banned by the rules; if they weren't everyone would use the "drainage holes" to feed the upper-deck of a double-deck diffuser.

You wouldn't need to have a hole directly through the floor. They could use a venturi bailer like in a boat - the outlet could be anywhere there's sufficient airflow.

I agree that at speed, water probably wouldn't be much of an issue. On the other hand, most of the laps run in the wet these days seem to be done so behind a safety car.

[Manoah2u]

yes, but still, the cockpit area really isn't that open - there's the head protection that surrounds a lot of the driver.
the driver itself is protected well from water with the racing overall. even behind a safety car, there's still plenty of wind
to 'push' rain away. a small hole on the lowest point of the cockpit would be enough to drain water elsewhere. that doesn't mean it goes through the floor - it can be directed for example into the 'empty' area where the carbon is formed to the buttocks of the driver, keeping the driver from experiencing possible trouble of water flooding towards the pedals when
under heavy braking.

still, it'll be minimal. it has to be like a monsoon, and then they aren't able to race.

[AnthonyG]

I think the waper vapourrises ior just gets "sucked" out due to the presure difference/the presure difference prevents water from entering.

I drive a convertible, in the rain the only noticeable amount of water enters via the windscreenwhiper who actually push it inside, without the windscreen whipers, you're ok at high speeds. I can imagine water entering in a tiny F1 cockpit isn't as much a problem.

[acosmichippo]

yes, but still, the cockpit area really isn't that open - there's the head protection that surrounds a lot of the driver.
the driver itself is protected well from water with the racing overall. even behind a safety car, there's still plenty of wind
to 'push' rain away. a small hole on the lowest point of the cockpit would be enough to drain water elsewhere. that doesn't mean it goes through the floor - it can be directed for example into the 'empty' area where the carbon is formed to the buttocks of the driver, keeping the driver from experiencing possible trouble of water flooding towards the pedals when
under heavy braking.

still, it'll be minimal. it has to be like a monsoon, and then they aren't able to race.

I'd think weight would be the main concern. In times where Ferrari is foregoing paint to save 500g, standing water in the cockpit is just unnecessary when a simple duct system could drain it.

[Per]

In our FSAE car we would get some standing water in our car in heavy rain, so we drilled some holes to get rid of it. But as your average speed in F1 is about 4 times higher I guess that indeed it is less of a problem. I reckon that whatever water does get into the cockpit, will be mostly absorbed by the driver's overall.

[slideways]

I did actually google " how do they stop the cockpit of an F1 car filling up with water" but nothing came up.

The correct answer to this of course being an umbrella.

In regards to drainage ... it's not just rain that needs to be evacuated. Piquet Sr would make a habbit of taking a huge piss as soon as he sat in a car, and many drivers have admitted to having relieved themselves at the wheel or been the subject of various stain/puddle based rumours.